May 25, 2007
One of the world's most prestigious health journals has lashed a fast-growing trend in the United States and Britain for "designer vaginas," the tabloid term for cosmetic surgery to the female genitalia.The fashion is being driven by commercial and media pressures that exploit women's insecurities and is fraught with unknowns, including a risk to sexual arousal, the British Medical Journal (BMJ) says.
Known as elective genitoplasty, the surgery usually entails shortening or changing the shape of the outer lips, or labia, but may also include reduction in the hood of skin covering the clitoris or shortening the vagina itself.
Anecdotal evidence suggests that the practice is spreading fast in the United States as well as in Britain, but the picture is unclear, the BMJ says.
If we in the West are going to continue to decry the genital mutilation of young girls for religious and cultural reasons, how can we countenance the mutilation of women in the developed world for reasons of fashion?
Posted by: Greg at
12:16 PM
| Comments (17)
| Add Comment
Post contains 179 words, total size 1 kb.
Posted by: Dan at Fri May 25 13:25:32 2007 (IU21y)
Posted by: Rhymes With Right at Fri May 25 14:45:00 2007 (h9M8T)
Besides, it's a silly article based on anecdotal evidence that is only interesting because of its shock value. Of all the problems in the world, this one manages to attract your attention not because of its seriousness, or impact on female health, or anything other than the fact that it excites a little rightwing prurient opportunity to talk about vaginas and how bad other people are. Yawn.
Posted by: Dan at Sat May 26 02:16:09 2007 (IU21y)
Abbreviations -- a concept you might choose to become familiar with (sort of like satire).
Posted by: Rhymes With Right at Mon May 28 01:48:25 2007 (3rx6w)
Truth, a concept you might choose to become familiar with.
Accuracy, a concept you might choose to become familiar with.
Research - oh, never mind - you'd never bother, when making stuff up is so much easier . . .
Posted by: Dan at Mon May 28 02:55:30 2007 (IU21y)
What does BMJ stand for?
British Medical Journal. The name was changed in 1988 (vol 297).
How much clearer can that get, Dan.
Your apology is accepted in advance.
Posted by: Rhymes With Right at Mon May 28 04:19:55 2007 (S/oB9)
You claimed "Actually, Dan, Thje (double sic!) proper Name (sic) of BMJ is 'The British Medical Journal'."
You were correct. In 1988. But now, the (or Thje) proper name (or Name) of BMJ is BMJ.
Really, this was a pretty simple one, and it would be nice if you could acknowledge your mistake for a change. Why do you have a pathological need to claim that you are constantly correct, when, sometimes, you are demonstrably wrong?
Posted by: Dan at Mon May 28 05:22:15 2007 (IU21y)
Posted by: Rhymes With Right at Mon May 28 06:49:28 2007 (b7cpj)
I agree it's a tiny deal, hardly worth pimping you about, but it's yet another instance of you being wrong and refusing to admit it.
And it's still crap journalism.
And it's still outrageous to compare a woman choosing to alter her vagina for her own reasons to forcibly scraping off a girl's clitoris with a rock.
You're wrong about that, too, but until you accept your fallibility on minor things, there's little hope for you being open minded to the bigger mistakes in your thinking. I'm trying to help you along with baby steps.
Now, for instance, do you agree that "the" should not be spelled "Thje"? Can you walk with me that far?
Posted by: Dan at Mon May 28 09:22:44 2007 (IU21y)
And sorry, it isn't outrageous to compare the alteration of female sex organs to meet with the demands of a patriarchal standard of female appearance and sexuality to the alteration of female sex organs (in part) to meet the demands of a patriarchal standard of female appearance and sexuality If you don't recognize that, then i guess you cannot understand my larger point.
Posted by: Rhymes With Right at Mon May 28 09:48:35 2007 (OA9mK)
Posted by: Dan at Mon May 28 10:30:53 2007 (IU21y)
Posted by: Rhymes With Right at Mon May 28 10:56:18 2007 (OA9mK)
Posted by: Dan at Mon May 28 13:37:44 2007 (IU21y)
Posted by: Rhymes With Right at Mon May 28 13:44:13 2007 (1BQDx)
(Now, how can you expect me to eschew typo flaming when you make such an admission. Freudian, perhaps?)
Actually, I have thought about your "larger point". I fear that your larger point may be that women are incapable of making choices of their own. Little girls who are held down and have their clitorises (sp?) scraped off are the equivalent of women who make a personal choice for their own reasons to have elective surgery done. You disagree with their choice, and I suspect I would, too, but I've never discussed this surgery with anyone who's had it, so I'm not willing to sit here with my circumcised dick and tell them they are wrong.
Posted by: Dan at Mon May 28 14:11:05 2007 (IU21y)
Posted by: Rhymes With Right at Mon May 28 16:26:59 2007 (dWCFi)
Posted by: Dan at Tue May 29 00:38:07 2007 (IU21y)
21 queries taking 0.0086 seconds, 46 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.